4 ms·

That allows vote buying/coercion. You show me your receipt, I verify that you voted the way I wanted, and you get money. Or, if the receipt shows you didn't vo

That allows vote buying/coercion. You show me your receipt, I verify that you voted the way I wanted, and you get money. Or, if the receipt shows you didn't vote like I told you to, I punch you in the face.

dilap 6y ago
No more so than vote by mail which we already have though (and is all Oregon does), right?
- akvadrako 6y ago
  Which is why vote by mail is so controversial; it eliminates the secret ballot. This would really hurt Trump, since he seems to have an unusually high percentage of “shy” voters.
  - hef19898 6y ago
    Mail voting is totally normal in Germany. And secret. Just because one country didn't solve it, doesn't mean it is an unsolved problem.
    - Spivak 6y ago
      It’s secret but not private. I really don’t care if my name is attached to my vote in a way that the gov’t potentially knows how I vote but it seems a lot of people do.
      - hef19898 6y ago
        Historically, there are a lot of cases were this turned out to be a huge problem. A lot of the German system, voting and otherwise, is influenced by the Nazi regime and it rise to power. That's why we have things like the 5% margin for parties to get seats in parliament. During the Weimar republic, one of the reasons why it was close to impossible to form stable coalitions was the high number of parties with seats. And the list goes on.
    - akvadrako 6y ago
      That sounds impossible. How do you prevent a dominant member of your household from checking what party you choose before the envelope is sealed?
- henrikschroder 6y ago
  True. But where I'm from you can vote by mail and in person, and if you do, your in-person vote cancels your mail-in vote. This means that even if someone coerces my mail vote, I can still override it on election day by showing up in person and vote in secret. ...and if whomever is coercing you to vote a certain way can also prohibit you from voting in person, you have bigger problems that border on kidnapping and illegal captivity.
  - thaumasiotes 6y ago
    > ...and if whomever is coercing you to vote a certain way can also prohibit you from voting in person, you have bigger problems that border on kidnapping and illegal captivity. Nonsense. You have whatever problems made your vote susceptible to coercion in the first place, no more and no less. It's not necessary for the other party to physically prevent you from voting in person. All they need to do is observe whether you do, and punish you accordingly.
    - henrikschroder 6y ago
      > All they need to do is observe whether you do, and punish you accordingly. Yes, but this doesn't scale, and again, it's bordering on illegal captivity. One person can maybe prohibit a couple of others into not going to vote in person, by living with them. Whereas if you have paper receipts that show what you voted for, one person can easily validate thousands of those, and punch everyone in the face who voted "wrong".
      - akvadrako 6y ago
        It does scale of course. The one example you mention is couples. Perhaps men prefer one candidate over women and pressure their wives to vote a certain way. How is that not scaling? Another example is unions. Perhaps the union and many colleagues prefer one candidate - if you sneak off to the voting booth you risk ostracization.
pbhjpbhj 6y ago
Is it possible to get verification and not have coercion? I was thinking that the verification would show you a list (with per vote random letters) Jones : D Vivek : J McAlan : C LaRousse : Q and you'd remember the letter next to your candidate. You could just lie to a coercer, "I voted Q" and actually have voted D, say. Not sure how you get from there to a confirmed vote though. It seems to require someone at some point to hold a key that can de-anonymise one's vote. That said de-anonymising votes in UK elections seems pretty easy, ballot papers have codes on; name and address is checked prior to vote.
- sarbaz 6y ago
  Check out https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ThreeBallot https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ThreeBallot It has some criticism, but IMO this is a very simple and effective method. And there are better ideas out there too. I think we can even build a mechanical machine (like out of buttons connected to stamps/ink) that can create valid threeballots. That way you don't have to explain the instructions.
heavenlyblue 6y ago
You can still do that via mail voting.

dilap 6y ago

No more so than vote by mail which we already have though (and is all Oregon does), right?

akvadrako 6y ago
Which is why vote by mail is so controversial; it eliminates the secret ballot. This would really hurt Trump, since he seems to have an unusually high percentage of “shy” voters.
- hef19898 6y ago
  Mail voting is totally normal in Germany. And secret. Just because one country didn't solve it, doesn't mean it is an unsolved problem.
  - Spivak 6y ago
    It’s secret but not private. I really don’t care if my name is attached to my vote in a way that the gov’t potentially knows how I vote but it seems a lot of people do.
    - hef19898 6y ago
      Historically, there are a lot of cases were this turned out to be a huge problem. A lot of the German system, voting and otherwise, is influenced by the Nazi regime and it rise to power. That's why we have things like the 5% margin for parties to get seats in parliament. During the Weimar republic, one of the reasons why it was close to impossible to form stable coalitions was the high number of parties with seats. And the list goes on.
  - akvadrako 6y ago
    That sounds impossible. How do you prevent a dominant member of your household from checking what party you choose before the envelope is sealed?
henrikschroder 6y ago
True. But where I'm from you can vote by mail and in person, and if you do, your in-person vote cancels your mail-in vote. This means that even if someone coerces my mail vote, I can still override it on election day by showing up in person and vote in secret. ...and if whomever is coercing you to vote a certain way can also prohibit you from voting in person, you have bigger problems that border on kidnapping and illegal captivity.
- thaumasiotes 6y ago
  > ...and if whomever is coercing you to vote a certain way can also prohibit you from voting in person, you have bigger problems that border on kidnapping and illegal captivity. Nonsense. You have whatever problems made your vote susceptible to coercion in the first place, no more and no less. It's not necessary for the other party to physically prevent you from voting in person. All they need to do is observe whether you do, and punish you accordingly.
  - henrikschroder 6y ago
    > All they need to do is observe whether you do, and punish you accordingly. Yes, but this doesn't scale, and again, it's bordering on illegal captivity. One person can maybe prohibit a couple of others into not going to vote in person, by living with them. Whereas if you have paper receipts that show what you voted for, one person can easily validate thousands of those, and punch everyone in the face who voted "wrong".
    - akvadrako 6y ago
      It does scale of course. The one example you mention is couples. Perhaps men prefer one candidate over women and pressure their wives to vote a certain way. How is that not scaling? Another example is unions. Perhaps the union and many colleagues prefer one candidate - if you sneak off to the voting booth you risk ostracization.

pbhjpbhj 6y ago

Is it possible to get verification and not have coercion? I was thinking that the verification would show you a list (with per vote random letters) Jones : D Vivek : J McAlan : C LaRousse : Q and you'd remember the letter next to your candidate. You could just lie to a coercer, "I voted Q" and actually have voted D, say. Not sure how you get from there to a confirmed vote though. It seems to require someone at some point to hold a key that can de-anonymise one's vote. That said de-anonymising votes in UK elections seems pretty easy, ballot papers have codes on; name and address is checked prior to vote.

sarbaz 6y ago
Check out https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ThreeBallot https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ThreeBallot It has some criticism, but IMO this is a very simple and effective method. And there are better ideas out there too. I think we can even build a mechanical machine (like out of buttons connected to stamps/ink) that can create valid threeballots. That way you don't have to explain the instructions.

heavenlyblue 6y ago

You can still do that via mail voting.